Like passers-by caught up in a shootout between two gangs, it was Derbyshire's misfortune to find themselves in the middle of a fierce battle for a Test place between two eager seamers on the second day of New Zealand's opening match of their tour of England.

Doug Bracewell and Neil Wagner claimed seven wickets between them as they fought for a position in the Test team, brushing aside Derbyshire for just 154 in the process. Only one batsman made more than 16, Wes Durston, and he was dropped on 6.

Later, despite a first innings lead of 135, New Zealand's batsmen suffered some setbacks of their own - their top five were all bowled in the second innings - before an unbroken sixth-wicket partnership of 105 between BJ Watling and Tom Latham restored the balance of power. By stumps New Zealand had extended their lead to 334.

It appears only one of the two New Zealand seamers can find a place in the team for the first Test at Lord's. While it has been presumed by many that Bracewell, who missed the Test series against England in New Zealand after injuring his foot on broken glass, will return to the side for the upcoming series, it seems nobody has told Wagner.

Certainly Wagner, who claimed 12 wickets in the series against England, is not going to relinquish his place without a fight. He bowled throughout the first hour on the second morning at Derby and added two wickets to the one he claimed the previous evening. As wholehearted as ever, Wagner sustained impressive pace, maintained a pretty good line and was rewarded with the wickets of Billy Godleman and Wayne Madsen, both of whom edged fine deliveries angled across them.

But Bracewell also provided a compelling reminder of his own case for inclusion. Strong as a bull, he generated a pace that was unappreciated by some of the Derbyshire tail-enders and, even if he over did the short ball a little, finished with four wickets. At one stage he had two in two balls - Dan Redfern caught in the slips as he fended at a well-directed delivery that bounced more than he expected and then Ross Whiteley, who is developing a reputation as a poor player of the short ball, also caught in the slips as he fended away from his face. Later he returned to defeat the timid strokes of Peter Burgoyne and Mark Footitt.

"I kind of see it like that," Bracewell said when asked if he thought he was involved in a 'bowl off' with Wagner. "Neil's come in and taken wickets so credit to him but every game you play you're trying to prove a point. That's what I'm trying to do. I've been looking forward to playing at Lord's for a while, so let's hope I can play and do well."

Bracewell admitted to having been "gutted" to have missed out on playing against England in New Zealand, but dismissed the inevitable questions about the context of the injury to his foot.

"I was looking forward to the England series," he said. "I felt my form was pretty good. There were a few stories, but I just stood on a piece of glass while I was cleaning up. I had a few mates round the night before and it happened in the morning. A few things got blown out of proportion and a few stories came out. People can believe what they want to.

"It was deep enough but it was more the bruising that took a bit longer to heal. It was pretty bad luck really. It made it pretty frustrating. A silly little thing like that to make you miss three Tests, important Tests, is pretty annoying."

It is possible New Zealand could play both Wagner and Bracewell at Lord's. While the positions of Tim Southeee and Trent Boult appear secure, there might be an argument for fielding four seamers and doing without the specialist spin of Bruce Martin. Kane Williamson could provide a spin option if required. But Martin, who here quickly settled to a probing length and found turn that was missing for the Derbyshire spinners, did his own case no harm when luring Durston down the pitch and having him stumped by substitute wicketkeeper Tom Latham, taking the opportunity to gain some experience with the gloves in these conditions. Later Martin saw Richard Johnson and the left-handed Matt Higginbottom caught at short extra-cover and short midwicket respectively as they drove uppishly - and obligingly - to the fielder positioned for the stroke.

It could have been worse for Derbyshire. Durston was put down in the gully by Kane Williamson off Wagner - a tough, low chance when the batsman had scored 6 - and went on to strike nine fours in a merry, counter-attacking innings.

This match has been watched by a disappointingly small number of spectators - it would be more accurate to call it a "sparse" than a "crowd" - but Derbyshire deserve credit for the wicket at the County Ground. While many Test venues have settled for low, slow tracks which do little for anyone, least of all the spectator, the pitch at Derby offers decent pace, bounce and a little movement for seamers and spinners. It is, in short, a fine cricket wicket.

The New Zealand bowlers were not alone in enjoying the conditions. Mark Footitt, a left-arm fast bowler who has promised so much for so long that he might be convicted of a cricketing version of perjury, added two wickets to the four he claimed in the first innings, again making the ball swing at pace. The left-handed Hamish Rutherford was beaten by a beauty that left him to take the top of off stump, while Dean Brownlie was enticed into a loose drive only to be beaten by swing and play-on off the inside edge. It was not a shot that will have done his case of retaining a Test place in front of the returning Martin Guptill a great deal of good.

But Guptill was unable to take advantage. Struggling a little with his balance, he was punished for pushing his bat out far in front of his pad by one that nipped back, while Peter Fulton fell in similar fashion to the impressive Alasdair Evans. Kane Williamson's delightful innings - a punch down the ground was the shot of the day - was ended when he played-on to a quicker one from Burgoyne, but Watling, elegant on the drive and strong on the sweep, and Latham looked untroubled by the support bowlers and snuffed out any lingering hopes Derbyshire had of clawing their way back into the game.

I must say as Englishman I'm impressed with Wagner boult and Martin and bracewell. But I like think in home conditions plus swann Back I think it will be different outcome though do prey for competitive series but England victory is what I hope for. I was disappointed with panesar especially when he played so well in India maybe sub continent is his ideal condition but then again growing up on grassy tracks of England surely that Carnot be true as he plays on these tracks feature prominently in New Zealand South Africa England and Australia .also on English domestic circuit broad swann certainly doing business so root etc

kiwicricketnut
on May 6, 2013, 2:58 GMT

Martin for me should be the guy to miss the lords test, he didn't do his job on the fifth day in auckland, english fans will correct me if im wrong but isn't lords a seamers paradise, especially this early in the season. Surely 4 seamers with williamson doing some grunt work in the 2nd innings would be the best mix. Batsmen look shakey but i wont worry till after the lions game, if latham keeps up his good form where does he fit surely you have to pick in form batters, good to see him give the selectors a headache, i hope they play him and reward form.

dummy4fb
on May 6, 2013, 1:11 GMT

Stick with same Xl as Auckland for the first test at least. Brownlie needs to be given a chance or two to score some runs after his efforts in South Africa. And I don't see the rush to bring Guptill back in; he's been found wanting as a Test opener and apart from a century against Bangladesh he never made an impact in the middle order either. Brownlie has performed when we needed him to against Australia and South Africa, two heavyweight teams, so there should be no rush to drop him.

regofpicton
on May 6, 2013, 0:12 GMT

Yes indeed - the openers are back to looking like the main problem.

I must admit to being unimpressed by Wagner earlier on, but no one tries harder or has much greater success. And if effort is to be the criterion, then maybe Southee should be the one to miss out.

Finally i think someone should compliment the report - a couple of very nice touches. Thank you!
.

Meety
on May 5, 2013, 23:43 GMT

If fit, they have to find a spot for Bracewell. IMO - had Bracewell played in NZ v Eng, he would of got NZ across the line in one of those matches, he is that good. I like Wagner, but he hasn;t always delivered his best at Test level, but the same can for all the other NZ bowlers. If it has to be 3 (not 4) seamers, then I would say it should be Bracewell, Wagner, & Southee. IF, Southee gets it right, he is one of the best swing bowlers around, but too often he is average. This was a good litmus test for the bowlers, as this was a reasonably strong batting line up, the NZ batsmen though were up against a fairly weak attack, so they haven't exactly distinguished themselves, the sooner McCullum & Taylor are in the better!

Bishop
on May 5, 2013, 23:42 GMT

@ The-Stoat Surely you mean Latham in for Brownlie? If you don't play Rutherford or Guptill (who I don't believe is an opener in any case) then who opens with Fulton? McCullum's value in the lower order is self-evident, and Watling has been tried at the top with fairly poor results. I think Guptill will need to perform against the Lions to warrant selection in the first test, and I think he should come in at 3, shuffling the rest down a place and dropping Brownlie. If he doesn't perform then I think Latham deserves his chance in the middle. Brownlie I think is done in any case.
In terms of bowling, you can't drop Southee. He was unlucky against England at home, and in swinging conditions (which we should have) he can be one of the world's most dangerous bowlers. Boult is also an automatic selection leaving the other three to fight it out for two spots.
Good times for NZ cricket when we're discussing who should miss out rather than who we can possibly select!

dummy4fb
on May 5, 2013, 23:16 GMT

Disappointing that the NZ openers and Guptil couldn't make the most of this opportunity to spend time in the middle and prove that they have what it takes to provide a solid platform for the middle order. That is going to prove crucial in this series and this is the time for all three to show they are more than just batsmen with potential. Great to see Watling continue to grow as a class act. He is someone who values his wicket and despite his success in the middle order, must be a contender for an opening spot if that others fail. Not convinced by Brownlie yet; nothing about his domestic record that justifies his seemingly immediate selection. The seam attack looks strong and pleasing to see Bracewell fighting back. But he has never delivered with the bat as expected and Wagner represents a much more reliable bowler who will bowl his heart out all day. Be a travesty to drop him.

loki897
on May 5, 2013, 21:22 GMT

No one has talked about New Zealand's batting in the second innings. four batsmen out for less than 10 should be ringing alarm bells.

vaughanw
on May 5, 2013, 18:55 GMT

Also agree that Wagners position should not be in question. He bowled beautifully in the England series, and offers something very different to Southee and Boult. He is possibly more dangerous with the older ball which gives them the perfect mix. I think the question is Martin or Bracewell? And that will depend on conditions. Good that Martin has bowled well also. Stick with the same 11 I say.

The-Stoat
on May 5, 2013, 18:48 GMT

Surely it's the batsmen that are playing for places... I would say Latham in for Rutherford, and Guptill out to make room for McCullum and Taylor.

Mitch1066
on May 6, 2013, 13:28 GMT

I must say as Englishman I'm impressed with Wagner boult and Martin and bracewell. But I like think in home conditions plus swann Back I think it will be different outcome though do prey for competitive series but England victory is what I hope for. I was disappointed with panesar especially when he played so well in India maybe sub continent is his ideal condition but then again growing up on grassy tracks of England surely that Carnot be true as he plays on these tracks feature prominently in New Zealand South Africa England and Australia .also on English domestic circuit broad swann certainly doing business so root etc

kiwicricketnut
on May 6, 2013, 2:58 GMT

Martin for me should be the guy to miss the lords test, he didn't do his job on the fifth day in auckland, english fans will correct me if im wrong but isn't lords a seamers paradise, especially this early in the season. Surely 4 seamers with williamson doing some grunt work in the 2nd innings would be the best mix. Batsmen look shakey but i wont worry till after the lions game, if latham keeps up his good form where does he fit surely you have to pick in form batters, good to see him give the selectors a headache, i hope they play him and reward form.

dummy4fb
on May 6, 2013, 1:11 GMT

Stick with same Xl as Auckland for the first test at least. Brownlie needs to be given a chance or two to score some runs after his efforts in South Africa. And I don't see the rush to bring Guptill back in; he's been found wanting as a Test opener and apart from a century against Bangladesh he never made an impact in the middle order either. Brownlie has performed when we needed him to against Australia and South Africa, two heavyweight teams, so there should be no rush to drop him.

regofpicton
on May 6, 2013, 0:12 GMT

Yes indeed - the openers are back to looking like the main problem.

I must admit to being unimpressed by Wagner earlier on, but no one tries harder or has much greater success. And if effort is to be the criterion, then maybe Southee should be the one to miss out.

Finally i think someone should compliment the report - a couple of very nice touches. Thank you!
.

Meety
on May 5, 2013, 23:43 GMT

If fit, they have to find a spot for Bracewell. IMO - had Bracewell played in NZ v Eng, he would of got NZ across the line in one of those matches, he is that good. I like Wagner, but he hasn;t always delivered his best at Test level, but the same can for all the other NZ bowlers. If it has to be 3 (not 4) seamers, then I would say it should be Bracewell, Wagner, & Southee. IF, Southee gets it right, he is one of the best swing bowlers around, but too often he is average. This was a good litmus test for the bowlers, as this was a reasonably strong batting line up, the NZ batsmen though were up against a fairly weak attack, so they haven't exactly distinguished themselves, the sooner McCullum & Taylor are in the better!

Bishop
on May 5, 2013, 23:42 GMT

@ The-Stoat Surely you mean Latham in for Brownlie? If you don't play Rutherford or Guptill (who I don't believe is an opener in any case) then who opens with Fulton? McCullum's value in the lower order is self-evident, and Watling has been tried at the top with fairly poor results. I think Guptill will need to perform against the Lions to warrant selection in the first test, and I think he should come in at 3, shuffling the rest down a place and dropping Brownlie. If he doesn't perform then I think Latham deserves his chance in the middle. Brownlie I think is done in any case.
In terms of bowling, you can't drop Southee. He was unlucky against England at home, and in swinging conditions (which we should have) he can be one of the world's most dangerous bowlers. Boult is also an automatic selection leaving the other three to fight it out for two spots.
Good times for NZ cricket when we're discussing who should miss out rather than who we can possibly select!

dummy4fb
on May 5, 2013, 23:16 GMT

Disappointing that the NZ openers and Guptil couldn't make the most of this opportunity to spend time in the middle and prove that they have what it takes to provide a solid platform for the middle order. That is going to prove crucial in this series and this is the time for all three to show they are more than just batsmen with potential. Great to see Watling continue to grow as a class act. He is someone who values his wicket and despite his success in the middle order, must be a contender for an opening spot if that others fail. Not convinced by Brownlie yet; nothing about his domestic record that justifies his seemingly immediate selection. The seam attack looks strong and pleasing to see Bracewell fighting back. But he has never delivered with the bat as expected and Wagner represents a much more reliable bowler who will bowl his heart out all day. Be a travesty to drop him.

loki897
on May 5, 2013, 21:22 GMT

No one has talked about New Zealand's batting in the second innings. four batsmen out for less than 10 should be ringing alarm bells.

vaughanw
on May 5, 2013, 18:55 GMT

Also agree that Wagners position should not be in question. He bowled beautifully in the England series, and offers something very different to Southee and Boult. He is possibly more dangerous with the older ball which gives them the perfect mix. I think the question is Martin or Bracewell? And that will depend on conditions. Good that Martin has bowled well also. Stick with the same 11 I say.

The-Stoat
on May 5, 2013, 18:48 GMT

Surely it's the batsmen that are playing for places... I would say Latham in for Rutherford, and Guptill out to make room for McCullum and Taylor.

22many
on May 5, 2013, 18:14 GMT

JM i agree....it was always going to be "can the openers produce what they produced back in NZ....if they dont , which I fear will be the case, then Williamson, Tayor, and Mc Cullum once again become the key to NZ success ...

nzcricket174
on May 5, 2013, 16:10 GMT

Why does Bracewell even have to come back in? His record is nothing to jump through hoops about.

jmcilhinney
on May 5, 2013, 14:31 GMT

NZ are obviously fairly well on top in this game but they won't be well-pleased to see their openers fail twice in this first game. It's early days for this tour but Rutherford and Fulton have started the way I think many feared they would fare in the last series in NZ. They both proved those doubters wrong and were an important reason for NZ performing very well at home. If they can't get a decent start in England then the pressure on the middle order may be telling.

dummy4fb
on May 5, 2013, 13:30 GMT

2 players playing for one spot? More like 3 players playing for two spots. Martin looks to be bowling well also, big decision for McCullum to make, but it's better to have these decisions to make than not.

dummy4fb
on May 5, 2013, 13:23 GMT

agree with Mitty, at least let southee have to fight for his place too.

Mitty2
on May 5, 2013, 12:55 GMT

Wagner's FC average is 25 and is faster than bracewell and southee, and on par with boult. He is accurate, wholehearted and pugnacious, three qualities present in Peter siddle, but qualities missing in a lot of contemporary paceman. He proved to be the backbone of NZ's bowling against England and it would be a terrible decision to drop him; bowlers like him and siddle are the best types to have at first change, and in conjunction with the fact that England struggled against these left-handers, if boult is certain, why drop him?

If anything, although he had a decent last test, it should be bracewell for southee.

Mitty2
on May 5, 2013, 12:55 GMT

Wagner's FC average is 25 and is faster than bracewell and southee, and on par with boult. He is accurate, wholehearted and pugnacious, three qualities present in Peter siddle, but qualities missing in a lot of contemporary paceman. He proved to be the backbone of NZ's bowling against England and it would be a terrible decision to drop him; bowlers like him and siddle are the best types to have at first change, and in conjunction with the fact that England struggled against these left-handers, if boult is certain, why drop him?

If anything, although he had a decent last test, it should be bracewell for southee.

Mitty2
on May 5, 2013, 12:55 GMT

Wagner's FC average is 25 and is faster than bracewell and southee, and on par with boult. He is accurate, wholehearted and pugnacious, three qualities present in Peter siddle, but qualities missing in a lot of contemporary paceman. He proved to be the backbone of NZ's bowling against England and it would be a terrible decision to drop him; bowlers like him and siddle are the best types to have at first change, and in conjunction with the fact that England struggled against these left-handers, if boult is certain, why drop him?

If anything, although he had a decent last test, it should be bracewell for southee.

dummy4fb
on May 5, 2013, 13:23 GMT

agree with Mitty, at least let southee have to fight for his place too.

dummy4fb
on May 5, 2013, 13:30 GMT

2 players playing for one spot? More like 3 players playing for two spots. Martin looks to be bowling well also, big decision for McCullum to make, but it's better to have these decisions to make than not.

jmcilhinney
on May 5, 2013, 14:31 GMT

NZ are obviously fairly well on top in this game but they won't be well-pleased to see their openers fail twice in this first game. It's early days for this tour but Rutherford and Fulton have started the way I think many feared they would fare in the last series in NZ. They both proved those doubters wrong and were an important reason for NZ performing very well at home. If they can't get a decent start in England then the pressure on the middle order may be telling.

nzcricket174
on May 5, 2013, 16:10 GMT

Why does Bracewell even have to come back in? His record is nothing to jump through hoops about.

22many
on May 5, 2013, 18:14 GMT

JM i agree....it was always going to be "can the openers produce what they produced back in NZ....if they dont , which I fear will be the case, then Williamson, Tayor, and Mc Cullum once again become the key to NZ success ...

The-Stoat
on May 5, 2013, 18:48 GMT

Surely it's the batsmen that are playing for places... I would say Latham in for Rutherford, and Guptill out to make room for McCullum and Taylor.

vaughanw
on May 5, 2013, 18:55 GMT

Also agree that Wagners position should not be in question. He bowled beautifully in the England series, and offers something very different to Southee and Boult. He is possibly more dangerous with the older ball which gives them the perfect mix. I think the question is Martin or Bracewell? And that will depend on conditions. Good that Martin has bowled well also. Stick with the same 11 I say.

loki897
on May 5, 2013, 21:22 GMT

No one has talked about New Zealand's batting in the second innings. four batsmen out for less than 10 should be ringing alarm bells.

dummy4fb
on May 5, 2013, 23:16 GMT

Disappointing that the NZ openers and Guptil couldn't make the most of this opportunity to spend time in the middle and prove that they have what it takes to provide a solid platform for the middle order. That is going to prove crucial in this series and this is the time for all three to show they are more than just batsmen with potential. Great to see Watling continue to grow as a class act. He is someone who values his wicket and despite his success in the middle order, must be a contender for an opening spot if that others fail. Not convinced by Brownlie yet; nothing about his domestic record that justifies his seemingly immediate selection. The seam attack looks strong and pleasing to see Bracewell fighting back. But he has never delivered with the bat as expected and Wagner represents a much more reliable bowler who will bowl his heart out all day. Be a travesty to drop him.